Ballah v. Industrial Commission

Supreme Court of Colorado

Ballah v. Industrial Commission

220 P.2d 552, 122 Colo. 165, 1950 Colo. LEXIS 233

CourtSupreme Court of Colorado

DecidedJuly 1, 1950

DocketNo. 16,415

StatusPublished

This text of 220 P.2d 552 (Ballah v. Industrial Commission) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Colorado primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Ballah v. Industrial Commission, 220 P.2d 552, 122 Colo. 165, 1950 Colo. LEXIS 233 (Colo. 1950).

Pincite

Opinion

Mr. Chief Justice Hilliard

delivered the opinion of the court.

A proceeding under the Workmen’s Compensation Act in which claimant enjoyed favorable finding and award at the hands of the Industrial Commission. In an appropriate proceeding instituted in the district court, it was ordered, adjudged and decreed that the award of the commission be, and the same was, “affirmed and sustained.”

The sole question involved on error, as it was at the hearing in the district court, is, Did the injury which claimant suffered, occur in the course of his employment? The points specified stress only that question, and the same limit is emphasized in the brief of plaintiff in error.

That claimant was gravely injured is not questioned, and that the award fixed by the commission conformed in sum to what the law provides in the circumstances here is unchallenged. We have been at' pains to read and reread the evidence—to detail which would serve no useful purpose—and are in accord with the finding and decree of the distinguished district judge, that since the “evidence is conflicting,” the question presented thereby was resolvable by the commission, which, addressing itself thereto, found and awarded as already stated. We do not perceive error.

Let the judgment be affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Mr. Chief Justice Hilliard

delivered the opinion of the court.

A proceeding under the Workmen’s Compensation Act in which claimant enjoyed favorable finding and award at the hands of the Industrial Commission. In an appropriate proceeding instituted in the district court, it was ordered, adjudged and decreed that the award of the commission be, and the same was, “affirmed and sustained.”

The sole question involved on error, as it was at the hearing in the district court, is, Did the injury which claimant suffered, occur in the course of his employment? The points specified stress only that question, and the same limit is emphasized in the brief of plaintiff in error.

That claimant was gravely injured is not questioned, and that the award fixed by the commission conformed in sum to what the law provides in the circumstances here is unchallenged. We have been at' pains to read and reread the evidence—to detail which would serve no useful purpose—and are in accord with the finding and decree of the distinguished district judge, that since the “evidence is conflicting,” the question presented thereby was resolvable by the commission, which, addressing itself thereto, found and awarded as already stated. We do not perceive error.

Let the judgment be affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

220 P.2d 552, 122 Colo. 165, 1950 Colo. LEXIS 233, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ballah-v-industrial-commission-colo-1950.